Lazy rock solid openings against e4 and d4 ??

Hello chessers,

being an intermediate palyer I am searching now for easy-to-learn openings against e4/d4. I have been playing for about 2 years the Scotch and the Icelandic Gambit with rather bad outcome. My biggest weakness is becoming solid in the openings against aggressive players.

Being a lazy and a weak opening learner I am looking forward to your suggestions.

Thanx in advance :-)

A Rock-Solid Chess Opening Repertoire for Black by Viacheslav Eingorn

http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Rock-Solid_Chess_Opening_Repertoire_for_Black.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627113531/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen156.pdf

(Not helpful with regard to "lazy".)

The Lazy Man's Sicilian by Valeri Bronznik and Steve Giddins

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9019.pdf

http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2015/8/22/a-fuller-review-of-the-lazy-mans-sicilian.html

(Not helpful with regard to "rock solid" and "d4".)

c6+d5 against everything is certainly a lazy, solid way to play. (Though, how "solidly" you play it depends on many factors.)

If you want to excel, however, you'll eventually want to devote some study to the openings (or else you might keep making the same mistakes without realizing it).

A Cunning Chess Opening for Black by Sergey Kasparov

Opening Repertoire ...c6

Looking for a "safe" opening is exactly the wrong approach if aggressive players are giving you trouble.  There is no safety from an attacking opponent if you give them enough time to develop.  What you need is to learn the art of counterplay.  The more aggressive player gets to choose what part of the board matters, and will almost always find a way to have numbers in the area around your king.

The weakness of aggressive players (at least the ones around your level) is that in formulating their plan of attack, they often neglect defense.  This means they are often weak elsewhere on the board.  Gambit openings (like the Scotch and the Icelandic) favor aggressive play, but they lead to unbalanced positions which both sides can exploit.

I used to be a "lazy" player myself, though an aggressive one.  It's tempting to find a "solid", comfortable opening, but in the long run in tends to impede your development as a player.  Further, the longer you stick to "safe" play, the harder it will be to abandon it in favor of more active strategies (which are much more effective).

You havent played any games here, and you did not post any games, so no one has any idea of your playing strength.  Openings may not even be the issue.

 He joined and posted this within the same hour... suspicious. 

I recommend the Caro-Kann vs 1 e4 and its cousin, the Slav, against 1 d4.  Both openings begin with ...c6 and ...d5 as the first two moves.  The main idea is to get your QB from c8 to f5 or g4 before playing ...e6, otherwise it's hard to develop as it is in the French or Queen's Gambit Declined Defenses.

Additionally, an early ...Nbd2 supports your counterattack at c5, f6, or b6.

When you say "lazy" opening, I hope you mean that from the not-memorizing-move-orders sense. NO defense is "rock solid" if you don't make some moves that threaten White.

Thanx for all the good advice guys !! 

@ DeirdreSkye:  Will look definetly into this Philidor/Old Indian combination. Caught my interest on the spot !!!

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9008.pdf

Play 1...d6 Against Everything

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9051.pdf

Against Philidor there's still some fun lines for White, e.g. Shirov's gambit (5.g4!?) and (if you enter the Philidor via 3...Nbd7) 4.g4 and 4.f4. The 3...e5 move order is fairly safe, though - 5.g4 can be met by 5...g6 or 5...h6, and the only real downside is that White can go for the queenless middlegame with 4.dxe5. However, even after 4.dxe5 there's still plenty of opportunity to outplay lower-rated opponents, and White shouldn't have much of an advantage, if any at all.

The Old Indian also seems quite safe and solid, although I have no experience of that.

I don't know how much opening theory you need to know if you're a beginner or intermediate player. I still don't really know any opening theory beyond the first 4 or 5 moves for pretty much any opening. Do your opponents really play all the book moves and punish you for deviations from theory? If you want to avoid tactics then you can try playing something solid where you wait a bit in the beginning to move forward later. Maybe try using some hedgehog type of pawn structure/opening.

Andy Soltis had a good (short) book from about 20 years ago, which recommends using a Caro-Kahn + Slav combination against all 1) e4 and 1) d4 openings by white.

That combination might be a tad more aggressive than the Philidor complex.

If that suits your taste. 

If I remember correctly, the Soltis Career book advocated a somewhat unusual line, 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dc 5 a4 Bg4. It also suggested 4...Nd7 after 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4. I understand that the recent Opening Repertoire: ...c6 suggests 4...Bf5 in the Caro-Kann, but, for 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3, it advocated 4...e6 (not exactly a choice for the lazy).

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7673.pdf

It would perhaps require more than one book to provide modern coverage in the spirit of the old Soltis book.

If I wanted something solid with a reduced workload and an element of surprise that could function at master level, at the moment I'd probably choose the 3...Qd8 Scandinavian and the Ragozin (like Pert recommends). I've played the Cozio Ruy Lopez as a surprise weapon before, but learning 1.e4 e5 as a whole is a significant project, albeit a rewarding one.

I know of a number of titled players who have played the Philidor and Pirc successfully as surprise weapons, but I think it takes significant strategic skill and versatility to use these openings effectively. It involves some risk to play at a space disadvantage and I've seen these openings recommended to lower rated players with disastrous results. They often play too passively and don't understand the dynamics of the positions.